Didiza dismisses calls for her recusal from Phala Phala processes

National Assembly speaker Thoko Didiza has dismissed African Transformation Movement (ATM) leader Vuyo Zungula’s call for her recusal from overseeing the Section 89 impeachment committee regarding President Cyril Ramaphosa’s Phala Phala matter.

Zungula argued that Didiza’s impartiality was compromised. He made reference to her 2022 vote against processing the Section 89 independent panel report when she was a cabinet minister, as well as her subsequent handling of the matter after a Constitutional Court judgment reviewed the process.

Zungula alleged that Didiza met with lawyers representing Ramaphosa after the Constitutional Court judgment relating to the Phala Phala matter, making her incapable of acting impartially in her capacity as speaker.

However, Didiza rejected the allegations, describing them as “false, unwarranted and defamatory”, and stated that Zungula’s call for her recusal was completely unjustified.

“These allegations are entirely false, without any factual basis, and appear to rely solely on tabloid reporting,” parliament spokesperson Moloto Mothapo said.

“The speaker reiterates that she has never met with the legal representatives of the president, either as alleged by Zungula or in any other context relating to this matter.”

Mothapo acknowledged that while Didiza works as an ANC MP and serves as a member of the party’s National Executive Committee and National Working Committee, she is simply required to attend meetings of these structures as part of her political responsibilities.

“Attendance at party meetings by members of parliament is lawful, normal and entirely consistent with South Africa’s constitutional democracy and multiparty political system,” Mothapo added, stating that Zungula’s allegations were based on pure speculation meant to tarnish the speaker’s credibility.

The speaker further rejected claims that her 2022 vote against the independent panel report constituted grounds for her recusal, clarifying that she was acting strictly in her role as an MP at the time.

“This proposition is without merit. The vote on the independent panel report was a decision of the National Assembly. At the time, Didiza participated in that vote in her capacity as an elected member of parliament, exercising the same constitutional rights and responsibilities afforded to every other member of the house.”

Mothapo asserted that Didiza would not be deterred from carrying out her constitutional responsibilities.

“Throughout this matter, she has acted in accordance with legal advice provided by parliament’s legal services office and will continue to do so in fulfilling her duties,” Mothapo said.

TimesLIVE